Cases 21 - 30 of 415
Harrison v. Dayton Municipal Court of Ohio et al
as 3:2023cv00345
Plaintiff:
Todd Harrison
Defendant:
Dayton Municipal Court of Ohio, Christopher Roberts, Christoopher Sturm and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Cedric Carter v. Rivershell Apartments, LLC, et al
as 23-1885
Plaintiff / Appellant:
CEDRIC CARTER
Defendant / Appellee:
RIVERSHELL APARTMENTS, LLC, jointly and severally, CONNIE ROBERTS, jointly and severally, ANDMARK RIVERSHELL APARTMENTS, LLC, jointly and severally and others
Doe et al v. Nessel et al
as 1:2023cv11655
Plaintiff:
John Doe and Tim Brown
Defendant:
Dana Nessel, Anica Letica, One Court of Justice and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02537
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv11944
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv01513
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00004
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Carter v. Bond
as 4:2023cv00082
Plaintiff:
Rodney Henry Carter
Defendant:
Robert Keith Bond
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Warwick v. City of Detroit, et al
as 2:2023cv11779
Plaintiff:
Joanne Warwick
Defendant:
Detroit, City of, Mike Duggan, Mary Sheffield and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv00535
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
